This invention relates to a process for processing natural gas to produce liquefied natural gas (LNG) that has a high methane purity. In particular, this invention is well suited to co-production of LNG by integration into natural gas processing plants that recover natural gas liquids (NGL) and/or liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) using a cryogenic process.
Natural gas is typically recovered from wells drilled into underground reservoirs. It usually has a major proportion of methane, i.e., methane comprises at least 50 mole percent of the gas. Depending on the particular underground reservoir, the natural gas also contains relatively lesser amounts of heavier hydrocarbons such as ethane, propane, butanes, pentanes and the like, as well as water, hydrogen, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and other gases.
Most natural gas is handled in gaseous form. The most common means for transporting natural gas from the wellhead to gas processing plants and thence to the natural gas consumers is in high pressure gas transmission pipelines. In a number of circumstances, however, it has been found necessary and/or desirable to liquefy the natural gas either for transport or for use. In remote locations, for instance, there is often no pipeline infrastructure that would allow for convenient transportation of the natural gas to market. In such cases, the much lower specific volume of LNG relative to natural gas in the gaseous state can greatly reduce transportation costs by allowing delivery of the LNG using cargo ships and transport trucks.
Another circumstance that favors the liquefaction of natural gas is for its use as a motor vehicle fuel. In large metropolitan areas, there are fleets of buses, taxi cabs, and trucks that could be powered by LNG if there was an economic source of LNG available. Such LNG-fueled vehicles produce considerably less air pollution due to the clean-burning nature of natural gas when compared to similar vehicles powered by gasoline and diesel engines which combust higher molecular weight hydrocarbons. In addition, if the LNG is of high purity (i.e., with a methane purity of 95 mole percent or higher), the amount of carbon dioxide (a “greenhouse gas”) produced is considerably less due to the lower carbon:hydrogen ratio for methane compared to all other hydrocarbon fuels.
The present invention is generally concerned with the liquefaction of natural gas as a co-product in a cryogenic gas processing plant that also produces natural gas liquids (NGL) such as ethane, propane, butanes, and heavier hydrocarbon components. A typical analysis of a natural gas stream to be processed in accordance with this invention would be, in approximate mole percent, 92.3% methane, 4.4% ethane and other C2 components, 1.5% propane and other C3 components, 0.3% iso-butane, 0.3% normal butane, 0.3% pentanes plus, with the balance made up of nitrogen and carbon dioxide. Sulfur containing gases are also sometimes present.
There are a number of methods known for liquefying natural gas. For instance, see Finn, Adrian J., Grant L. Johnson, and Terry R. Tomlinson, “LNG Technology for Offshore and Mid-Scale Plants”, Proceedings of the Seventy-Ninth Annual Convention of the Gas Processors Association, pp. 429-450, Atlanta, Ga., Mar. 13-15, 2000 and Kikkawa, Yoshitsugi, Masaaki Ohishi, and Noriyoshi Nozawa, “Optimize the Power System of Baseload LNG Plant”, Proceedings of the Eightieth Annual Convention of the Gas Processors Association, San Antonio, Tex., Mar. 12-14, 2001 for surveys of a number of such processes. U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,445,917; 4,525,185; 4,545,795; 4,755,200; 5,291,736; 5,363,655; 5,365,740; 5,600,969; 5,615,561; 5,651,269; 5,755,114; 5,893,274; 6,014,869; 6,053,007; 6,062,041; 6,119,479; 6,125,653; 6,250,105 B1; 6,269,655 B1; 6,272,882 B1; 6,308,531 B1; 6,324,867 B1; 6,347,532 B1; International Publication Number WO 01/88447 A1 published Nov. 22, 2001; our co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/839,907 filed Apr. 20, 2001; our co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/161,780 filed Jun. 4, 2002; and our co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/278,610 filed Oct. 23, 2002 also describe relevant processes. These methods generally include steps in which the natural gas is purified (by removing water and troublesome compounds such as carbon dioxide and sulfur compounds), cooled, condensed, and expanded. Cooling and condensation of the natural gas can be accomplished in many different manners. “Cascade refrigeration” employs heat exchange of the natural gas with several refrigerants having successively lower boiling points, such as propane, ethane, and methane. As an alternative, this heat exchange can be accomplished using a single refrigerant by evaporating the refrigerant at several different pressure levels. “Multi-component refrigeration” employs heat exchange of the natural gas with one or more refrigerant fluids composed of several refrigerant components in lieu of multiple single-component refrigerants. Expansion of the natural gas can be accomplished both isenthalpically (using Joule-Thomson expansion, for instance) and isentropically (using a work-expansion turbine, for instance).
While any of these methods could be employed to produce vehicular grade LNG, the capital and operating costs associated with these methods have generally made the installation of such facilities uneconomical. For instance, the purification steps required to remove water, carbon dioxide, sulfur compounds, etc. from the natural gas prior to liquefaction represent considerable capital and operating costs in such facilities, as do the drivers for the refrigeration cycles employed. This has led the inventors to investigate the feasibility of integrating LNG production into cryogenic gas processing plants used to recover NGL from natural gas. Such an integrated LNG production method would eliminate the need for separate gas purification facilities and gas compression drivers. Further, the potential for integrating the cooling/condensation for the LNG liquefaction with the process cooling required for NGL recovery could lead to significant efficiency improvements in the LNG liquefaction method.
In accordance with the present invention, it has been found that LNG with a methane purity in excess of 99 percent can be co-produced from a cryogenic NGL recovery plant without reducing the NGL recovery level using less energy than prior art processes. The present invention, although applicable at lower pressures and warmer temperatures, is particularly advantageous when processing feed gases in the range of 400 to 1500 psia [2,758 to 10,342 kPa(a)] or higher under conditions requiring NGL recovery column overhead temperatures of −50° F. [−46° C.] or colder.
In the following explanation of the above figures, tables are provided summarizing flow rates calculated for representative process conditions. In the tables appearing herein, the values for flow rates (in moles per hour) have been rounded to the nearest whole number for convenience. The total stream rates shown in the tables include all non-hydrocarbon components and hence are generally larger than the sum of the stream flow rates for the hydrocarbon components. Temperatures indicated are approximate values rounded to the nearest degree. It should also be noted that the process design calculations performed for the purpose of comparing the processes depicted in the figures are based on the assumption of no heat leak from (or to) the surroundings to (or from) the process. The quality of commercially available insulating materials makes this a very reasonable assumption and one that is typically made by those skilled in the art.
For convenience, process parameters are reported in both the traditional British units and in the units of the International System of Units (SI). The molar flow rates given in the tables may be interpreted as either pound moles per hour or kilogram moles per hour. The energy consumptions reported as horsepower (HP) and/or thousand British Thermal Units per hour (MBTU/Hr) correspond to the stated molar flow rates in pound moles per hour. The energy consumptions reported as kilowatts (kW) correspond to the stated molar flow rates in kilogram moles per hour. The LNG production rates reported as gallons per day (gallons/D) and/or pounds per hour (Lbs/hour) correspond to the stated molar flow rates in pound moles per hour. The LNG production rates reported as cubic meters per day (m3/D) and/or kilograms per hour (kg/H) correspond to the stated molar flow rates in kilogram moles per hour.